Showing posts with label gender and culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender and culture. Show all posts
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Things to Read I Recommend
1) I'm currently reading Going Solo - The Extraordinary Rise and Surprising Appeal of Living Alone by NYU professor of sociology, Eric Klinenberg. I've known about the research for about 5 years but had no idea that the book had just come out. Klinenberg suggests that living alone provides “restorative solitude” and that it may be “exactly what we need to reconnect.”
His data suggests that single living is an inevitable outgrowth of mainstream liberal values. Women’s liberation, widespread urbanization, communications technology, and increased longevity—these four trends lend our era its cultural contours, and each gives rise to solo living. The “communications revolution” that began with the telephone and continues with Facebook helps dissolve the boundary between social life and isolation. Urban culture caters heavily to autonomous singles, both in its social diversity and in its amenities: gyms, coffee shops, food deliveries, laundromats, and the like ease solo subsistence. Kleinenberg points out that almost unequivocally all of his many subjects said that being lonely meant choosing to be with the wrong person.
I will review the book once I am done reading it.
2) This is a truly fascinating essay. I'm currently using it on my own research. It comes from the 18th century and the very homophobic England. Jeremy Bentham had the courage to pen this at a time when paederasty was punished by hanging.
"Bentham advocates the decriminalization of sodomy, which in his day was punished by hanging. He argues that homosexual acts do not "weaken" men, or threaten population or marriage, and documents their prevalence in ancient Greece and Rome. Bentham opposes punishment on utilitarian grounds and attacks ascetic sexual morality."
Bentham contextualizes the discussion of homosexuality by first highlighting its mainstream-ness in Ancient Greece and Rome. He says, "In Athens and in ancient Rome in the most flourishing periods of the history of those capitals, regular intercourse between the sexes was scarcely much more common. It was upon the same footing throughout Greece: everybody practised it; nobody was ashamed of it."
3) This is pretty, pretty good. As a long-time fan of Tyler Cowen, I'm so pre-ordering this. The six rules for dining out:
"When you enter a restaurant, you don’t want to see expressions of disgust on the diners’ faces, but you do want to see a certain seriousness of purpose. Pull out a mirror and try eating some really good food. How much are you smiling? Not as much as you might think. A small aside: in many restaurants, it is a propitious omen when the diners are screaming at each other. It’s a sign they are regular customers and feel at home."
More here.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Couples Wearing Each Other's Clothes
My best friend just made me aware of the following photographs by sincerelyhana.com showcasing gender performance in the sartorial confines of quotidianity. The photographs proved distracting as I navigate fatigue. As I was perusing the site, I got to thinking of a sort-of-similar exercise in my own life.
The exercise was most curious as it went beyond fabric choice, situational layering, and gender performance. The semiotics of fashion is something I've long concerned myself with as I've always deemed presentation to be much more than just unsubstantiated form. The first time I was asked to give up an item of clothing for the purpose of swapping was in my first long-term relationship. Apparently, it was some sort of a rite of passage. I was asked for a t-shirt so that the other party could wear it when being away for a week.
I found the request strange.
As much as I'm keen on tropes, my brain is a tad too enamored with literalness. I'm attached to the words' literal meaning. This propensity is what made me excel in academic pursuits. It's mostly a challenge when dealing with people who don't view words as a melange of primary, secondary, and tertiary meanings, but I'm getting off topic.
I suppose, it's hard to shake linguistic conditioning and having grown up with lexical diversity, getting attached to primary meanings meant clearer communication and easier living.
The question was: "Can I take one of your shirts with me?"
My answer was something akin to, "Oh, do you need to get a new one for the trip? We can go and buy you one." Instantaneously, I went through my inventory of shirts and I started thinking which shirt the other party had in mind. "Which one was goes went well with your travel pants and shoes?"
"What do you mean?"
"I mean, which color?"
"Why does that matter?"
"Well, you want it to go with your other stuff, ja?"
"The color doesn't matter. Just any shirt will do."
I remember finding the request most bizarre at that point. And, just like I tend to do with topics I'm not fully satisfied with and/or finished with, I got to work.
I missed the point of the request. The request came from a place of intimacy and olfactory closeness. I saw it as one of travelling need. I was fretting about it. "Well, I can give you this, or that, or the other one. I mean, I like green. You don't care for green. I like form-fitting, you'll have a hard time with that. Unless you wear it as an undergarment type thing and then you wear a shirt of your own that fits on top of it. Should we go shopping? Let's go shopping and we'll find something like the one I have but in your size. Then we can be twins."
"Just pick one, really. The one you have on will do, actually."
At that point I distinctly remember thinking, "but I wear this Tuesdays. It's my comfort Tuesday shirt. I write in this. Why would you want this one?! What would I be wearing on Tuesday then?"
I actually, left my office in the middle of the day, went to a department store, and actually bought the exact same favorite shirt of mine but in another size. I was proud of myself for having found it. Eureka! But then when I got home, my beaming vanished when my shirt was met with: "you got me a new one?! [Grunt] It's fine really. I meant one of your own. You know, a used one."
I was still dense.
I still didn't get it. "Should I have gone to a vintage store, you know, I don't like the smell in places like that but we can go and see if we can find a second-hand shirt that looks like mine." As soon as I said it, we both started laughing as I became aware of my having completely missed the point of the exercise. In an effort to appear more of a caring person, I said, "how about this? How about you pick one of mine and I'll pick one of yours. You don't have anything green, do you?"
My literal self still found it bizarre that we had to swap shirts. My figurative self found the exercise interesting, however. And there we went. We swapped shirts and lied to each other. We did what was expected of a shirt-swapping couple. We lied about what a good fit the other's shirt was and how it went well with our respective complexions. And yada, yada, yada.
You can see the rest of the couples' switcheroo project here.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Steve McQueen's Shame: A Review
I saw Shame today. I like Michael Fassbender in most the films he's done with one exception: Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds.
I generally tend to not judge accents as I'm a veritable soup of idiolects myself. However, Fassbender's accent in Inglourious Basterds is the stuff of headaches. But back to the Steve McQueen's Shame.
I like Fassbender's work a good deal. There's a certain gravitas he projects that few actors have the ability to carry. Born in Germany and raised in Ireland, he's a picture of cultural and linguistic diversity which is perhaps the reason why he appears to effortlessly play anything from a New Yorker to an aristocrat a-la-Jane-Eyre, or an X-Men-er.
The premise of Shame is the 'text' of shame and how it is engendered within a Judeo-Christian framework regardless of how far from prescribed religiosity it finds itself. I found the form of the film beautifully mimetic of a religious ritual. One good decision McQueen made is to go for Fassbender. It takes courage to take on certain roles and I most definitely don't see a Brad Pitt or a Clooney doing the same thing. Ok, maybe Colin Farrell or Jared Leto who by the way came to a mind a lot when viewing this film. Think, Requiem for a Dream, perhaps.
Most critics regard the film to be an examination of modern/urban sociality and how much the contemporary person wants to be tethered to others even though a good deal of current life seems to be about heightened individuality and insularity. McQueen's cinematic strength is not content, however. As a matter of fact, it rarely is. One thing he seems to do well, however, is explore the substance of form. The shots are clean, fast but not furious. McQueen's choices made me think of Doug Liman's portraiture styles. The camera rests on the characters just long enough till it gets moving again to the next point in the plot. Incidentally, this is how the film manages to deviate dullness. Aesthetically, this film is rich. Some of the city shots were also reminiscent of Nicolas Winding Refn's film Drive.
The past few years, at least since the actual boom of web 2.0, there seems to be little, if any, change in aesthetics. Incidentally, Vanity Fair's Kurt Andersen has a new article out on the question whether we as a culture are stagnating aesthetically. I thought of it while watching the film, actually. You can read it here.
I suppose it makes sense that form remains the one last frontier that's resisting change as all else around it has been changing mercilessly. Think technology. Hanging on to one thing seems to be the one crutch one needs to cope with the novelty and unpredictability of everything. Or is it? This seems to be the question that Brandon, the main character, tries to answer and eventually reject. Much in life seems to come easily to him. Much but not everything. He seems to bridle all else but basic urges about things he deems utterly trivial in broad daylight and when in the company of full lucidity.
Brandon seems to have it all on the surface. He's well employed, is generally well liked, at least on the surface, and seems to be governed by self-discipline. Only, he doesn't seem to do so as well as he appears.
He appears to want to connect to the world but the world seems to move simply too fast for him. His attachments are flimsy and most of the people he meets are forgettable. There seems to be a crisis of supply and demand when it comes to meaningful human connectivity. Brandon wants the opposite of what he has but the urban survival camp doesn't seem to be capable of providing it. He desperately wants the opposite of what he can get and every time he tries to leave his patterns of living, he falls right back into the known regardless of how much it is mired in dysfunction. Every night he goes after a new pursuit so that the next morning he can go back to all he knows.
Carey Mulligan plays his sister. I have only liked her in one film, An Education. All the other films that have ensued are nothing more than an imitation of her debut film. But then again, it would be hard to compliment a character who needs little support. Fassbender is no Pitt. He needs little support from other characters. A better script would have helped, no doubt.
Jessica Chastain is good in this. Very good. She's another example of an underrated performer often stuck in incoherent filmic choices, think the widely overrated The Help.
In sum, I enjoyed seeing Fassbender and I enjoyed the cinematography of Shame. What I didn't enjoy is McQueen's verbose effort to school the audience on addiction. His effort was, at best, sophomoric. His director of photography, however gets an A. Fassbender gets a solid A- but only because there's only that much he can do given the script.
In Shame, he is close to aces.
This film won't make you want to go back and brush up on your Descartes. Or perhaps Kant. It might just make you want to watch a bit of Kubrick and perhaps get a bit melancholy that he's been gone for a bit over a decade now.
I generally tend to not judge accents as I'm a veritable soup of idiolects myself. However, Fassbender's accent in Inglourious Basterds is the stuff of headaches. But back to the Steve McQueen's Shame.
I like Fassbender's work a good deal. There's a certain gravitas he projects that few actors have the ability to carry. Born in Germany and raised in Ireland, he's a picture of cultural and linguistic diversity which is perhaps the reason why he appears to effortlessly play anything from a New Yorker to an aristocrat a-la-Jane-Eyre, or an X-Men-er.
The premise of Shame is the 'text' of shame and how it is engendered within a Judeo-Christian framework regardless of how far from prescribed religiosity it finds itself. I found the form of the film beautifully mimetic of a religious ritual. One good decision McQueen made is to go for Fassbender. It takes courage to take on certain roles and I most definitely don't see a Brad Pitt or a Clooney doing the same thing. Ok, maybe Colin Farrell or Jared Leto who by the way came to a mind a lot when viewing this film. Think, Requiem for a Dream, perhaps.
Most critics regard the film to be an examination of modern/urban sociality and how much the contemporary person wants to be tethered to others even though a good deal of current life seems to be about heightened individuality and insularity. McQueen's cinematic strength is not content, however. As a matter of fact, it rarely is. One thing he seems to do well, however, is explore the substance of form. The shots are clean, fast but not furious. McQueen's choices made me think of Doug Liman's portraiture styles. The camera rests on the characters just long enough till it gets moving again to the next point in the plot. Incidentally, this is how the film manages to deviate dullness. Aesthetically, this film is rich. Some of the city shots were also reminiscent of Nicolas Winding Refn's film Drive.
The past few years, at least since the actual boom of web 2.0, there seems to be little, if any, change in aesthetics. Incidentally, Vanity Fair's Kurt Andersen has a new article out on the question whether we as a culture are stagnating aesthetically. I thought of it while watching the film, actually. You can read it here.
I suppose it makes sense that form remains the one last frontier that's resisting change as all else around it has been changing mercilessly. Think technology. Hanging on to one thing seems to be the one crutch one needs to cope with the novelty and unpredictability of everything. Or is it? This seems to be the question that Brandon, the main character, tries to answer and eventually reject. Much in life seems to come easily to him. Much but not everything. He seems to bridle all else but basic urges about things he deems utterly trivial in broad daylight and when in the company of full lucidity.
Brandon seems to have it all on the surface. He's well employed, is generally well liked, at least on the surface, and seems to be governed by self-discipline. Only, he doesn't seem to do so as well as he appears.
He appears to want to connect to the world but the world seems to move simply too fast for him. His attachments are flimsy and most of the people he meets are forgettable. There seems to be a crisis of supply and demand when it comes to meaningful human connectivity. Brandon wants the opposite of what he has but the urban survival camp doesn't seem to be capable of providing it. He desperately wants the opposite of what he can get and every time he tries to leave his patterns of living, he falls right back into the known regardless of how much it is mired in dysfunction. Every night he goes after a new pursuit so that the next morning he can go back to all he knows.
Carey Mulligan plays his sister. I have only liked her in one film, An Education. All the other films that have ensued are nothing more than an imitation of her debut film. But then again, it would be hard to compliment a character who needs little support. Fassbender is no Pitt. He needs little support from other characters. A better script would have helped, no doubt.
Jessica Chastain is good in this. Very good. She's another example of an underrated performer often stuck in incoherent filmic choices, think the widely overrated The Help.
In sum, I enjoyed seeing Fassbender and I enjoyed the cinematography of Shame. What I didn't enjoy is McQueen's verbose effort to school the audience on addiction. His effort was, at best, sophomoric. His director of photography, however gets an A. Fassbender gets a solid A- but only because there's only that much he can do given the script.
In Shame, he is close to aces.
This film won't make you want to go back and brush up on your Descartes. Or perhaps Kant. It might just make you want to watch a bit of Kubrick and perhaps get a bit melancholy that he's been gone for a bit over a decade now.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Hmm. You Want a PhD in the Humanities?
My good friend just sent this to me. Alas, much of it is true. It's especially interesting if one has a graduate degree, is a college professor, and has had countless conversations with students who come for advice whether or not to go to graduate school.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Podcast: The United States of Tara
Below you can see me discuss the Showtime Series The United States of Tara. I am making my podcasts available over YouTube and will be posting and linking them here from the YouTube channel.
Friday, April 2, 2010
New Videocast: "Bored to Death" - A Review

In this new episode of Gendering the Media, I analyze HBO's new show Bored to Death. Bored to Death is a real treat especially to those who are in the business of literature and literature translated on the screen. In this analysis I mostly focus on the professional and personal relationship between the characters of George (Ted Danson) and Jonathan (Jason Schwartzman).
Note to self: Next time make sure to place the mic on the other side of the shirt. The episode will also be available on iTunes.
You may view the episode here.
Feedback welcome.
Subscribe to Gendering the Media Podcast
graph per hbo
Thursday, March 11, 2010
New Videocast: Big Love, an Analysis

In this new episode I discuss the new season of the HBO show Big Love.
You may see me discuss this videocast here.
You may also view the episode on iTunes under the podcast series that bears my name.
Feedback welcome.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Mysteries of Pittsburgh, a Review
Mysteries of Pittsburgh is available OnDemand now. I thought I'd give it a careful look this time.
It's a tricky thing, this watching-film-based-on-literature thing as the viewer already had a preconceived notion of plot in mind.
Michael Chabon's first novel by the same title served as the inspiration for this film. Loose inspiration. Very loose.
As I was informed by a HetPer reader who also kindly sent me the screenplay to this film a few months ago this production was a rather sophomoric attempt.
I agree with him now.
But the film still has one important redeeming quality. I'll explain.
I gave the screenplay a looksee and it did seem to differ much from the novel. But then again, filmic adaptation is supposed to bring a number of differences and much novelty with it.
You see what makes Michael Chabon so brilliant is his infallible instinct about gender and gendered traits. Few authors can decode gender and sexuality the way he can. Naturally, his unique instinct is rather challenging to translate on the big screen and some understanding is required when judging any director's effort who attempts to adapt him.
One of the things that bothered me about Mysteries of Pittsburgh, the film, was the fact that they completely erased an entire character, Arthur.
Another thing which sort of relates to the first plot problem listed, is that the character of Cleveland who in the book is portrayed as rather heteronormative was turned into the love object of both Jane and Art.
Bad decision there.
Even though the usually brilliant Peter Saarsgard played Cleveland, it still left me, the reader/viewer wanting for more. A waste of talent, really.
One of the things that makes the book so poetic is the Art/Arthur relationship. This is at the very core of the book and it is entirely left out.
Ah, and then there's the Sienna Miller-played Jane who is too much in the center of the film. Miller has range but in this case her range was a little too wide. Less of her would have been more for the overall film.
Mena Suvari's Phlox could have been used more as the few minutes she's on the screen she does somehow bring you back to the novel. Suvari's version of Phlox looks like the French major Phlox in the book. Alas, she wasn't used enough.
And then there's Nick Nolte's 'Dad' character who could have been clothed with better lines but, of course, wasn't.
The one thing that delivers in this film is the city of Pittsburgh itself. I am lucky to be one of those people who gets the area and its references. This is a part of the country that one needs to see/experience to get. The heavy industrial traces of huge bridges and once productive factories are captured well enough in this film. They're not captured the way Curtis Hanson so brilliantly did in his version of the Chabon-inspired Wonder Boys, however.
Cities like Pittsburgh are difficult to capture for the big screen as they are truly multilayered. Even though they ooze concrete urban and industrial vibes, they're also somehow rustic. It's an odd combo but it's also what makes this neck of the woods so uniquely beautiful.
Even though geographically I tend to privilege the West, there's something truly poetic about Pittsburgh. It's one of those places where literature can get inspired.
Mysteries of Pittsburgh has many cinematic flaws.
It's one redeeming quality, however, is its capturing of Pittsburgh.
After those of you whom I know in real life have had a chance to see this film, I know I'll most likely receive texts saying, 'I liked the book better.'
As you should.
However, I find myself espousing a kind of compassionate leniency that's informed by one thing and one thing alone: Pittsburgh.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
The Economics of Being a 'Hef' Girlfriend
Yowsah, yowsah!
"Being a Hefner Girlfriend was a specialised job, not to be confused with being a Playboy Playmate. In fact, Girlfriends were not allowed to become Playmates because Hef had found that they tended to flee the Mansion as soon as they collected their $25,000 Playmate cheque. Girlfriends were given their own bedroom, an allowance of $1,000 a week in cash, a new car, free dental and medical treatment, almost limitless clothes, hairdos, make-up and facials and all the cosmetic surgery they could wish for – Izabella reckons Hef shelled out $70,000 a year on breast implants. "
Read more here.
"Being a Hefner Girlfriend was a specialised job, not to be confused with being a Playboy Playmate. In fact, Girlfriends were not allowed to become Playmates because Hef had found that they tended to flee the Mansion as soon as they collected their $25,000 Playmate cheque. Girlfriends were given their own bedroom, an allowance of $1,000 a week in cash, a new car, free dental and medical treatment, almost limitless clothes, hairdos, make-up and facials and all the cosmetic surgery they could wish for – Izabella reckons Hef shelled out $70,000 a year on breast implants. "
Read more here.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
And Rachel Maddow Adds This
Rachel Maddow is correcting the factual record from the conversation she had with Pat Buchanan on her show a few days ago about Judge Sotomayor, Affirmative Action, and Sotomayor's record of academic writing.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Entourage, Season 5
On one of my international flights, the flight attendant looked like she was uttering something to me. Alas, my earphones were already streaming audio from my MacBook to my ears and, as far as I was concerned, no other audio mattered. I was after all watching the "Gotta Look Up to Get Down" episode from Entourage, Season 5. And, I and mine will attest, since the Sunday HBO played this months ago, I knew I was going to get hooked. This 27-minute episode is packed with literary and cultural references to aesthetics, gender, work and family dynamics, the form/content clash and so forth. In sum, it's a gem.
I remove the earphones to find out what the content of her comment was all about.
"Nice! You're watching Entourage." said the friendly flight attendant to which I said, "Yeah! It rocks."
But, you see, it's not just this episode that is ripe with rich motifs. The entire Season Five is a gem. The way Stellan SkarsgÄrd portrays a kooky German director, or how Jason Isaacs so convincingly portrays a not-so-straight performing straight-acting fashion businessman. And on and on.
I have already blogged about the ending of the "Gotta Look Up to Get Down" episode which features one of the most tender scenes I have analyzed this year. A sensitive Ari Gold puts his emotions on display for his favorite client, Vinnie Chase, to witness.
Portraying Ari's vulnerability is what's proving to be Jeremy Piven's opportunity to show the world his acting chops and that he's so much more than John Cusack's side kick or a potential George Costanza. Ari Gold is the making of Entourage. He has a kind of range that is really almost overwhelming me every time I watch this show.
What has made a lot of my recent trips more enjoyable has been the following:
The newly released Season Five of Entourage
Steve Martin's Shopgirl, the last 6 minutes of the film
Three minutes out of Zach Braff's Garden State, the "You're in it right now, aren't you?" scene.
I'll explain.
Being a close reader by training, I have a trained (and natural) tendency to zoom in on certain snippets of texts. Close reading, I am told at home and out, is not just how I make my bread and butter, it's an extension of my nature. Ergo, focusing on certain segments in certain filmic pieces is as natural to me as griping about my Venti Macchiato coming my way lid-less and sleeve-less. Incidentally, getting easily vexed by such oh-so-menial faux annoyances like a lid-less and sleeve-less Starbucks drink is yet another side effect of close reading.
Whether you share my close reading tendencies or not, you should consider getting the newly released Season Five of Entourage.
I give it thumbs and toes up. Season Six of Entourage will start July 12th on HBO.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Hangover, the movie

Well, it's about time they made a movie about it, eh?
Yes, I did see The Hangover.
What sold the movie to me was this here attached poster of Bradley Cooper.
I first saw this poster on a foreign subway station and I remember thinking, 'add this to the list of things to see.'
So, we went to the movies. Even got popcorn. And I don't do popcorn. I don't do Blockbuster movies either, but there you have it. Every rule has them. Exceptions, that is.
Now, B.R., the movie goer, will say that she liked the film. She actually laughed a lot. I found myself laughing the most when the characters were satirizing the comic text that is Vegas. In this regard my laughter was influenced by B.R.'s travel bug and academic eye for close reading. But why bring that up here. We're talking about an entire movie the premise of which is, 'what the heck happened last night after exorbitant amounts of alcohol were consumed?'
Right.
I can't really use literary theory to decode this.
Well, I could try but I reckon I've had enough comedy for a week.
The main reason, however, why I suggested that we go to the theater and watch this film is because of Bradley Cooper. I first noticed Cooper when he appeared in another mind-teaser (my coinage, folks). Don't judge. It was summer. My best pal was visiting from Germany and our house was hot due to air conditioning being on sabbatical for weeks. We lived in the dessert after all. Yada, yada, yada, we were in the mood for Wilson/Vaugh jokes.
Anyway, Cooper's performance in the Wedding Crashers did make me think. I remember noting that he would go places. His blood-shot eyes seemed to have a kind of torture quality to them that made them interesting.
Plus, Bradley Cooper is a beautiful person. He sports a kind of masculinity that's moderately bathed in feminine sensitivity. Ah, and his upper body suggests that he lifts and does yoga. Yes, I do watch films at times mostly because of who stars in them. Blame it on my weakness for aesthetics.
So, yes, I watched the Hangover. No, I won't officially review it here. I've got my rap to worry about, after all.
I will note two things about it: it captured Vegas realistically. If you're like me and have spent time in the dessert city you will feel like you're right on the set.
And Bradley Cooper. Objectification aside, I look forward to seeing him properly cast so that he can show his acting chops better. But for now, let him take advantage of his aesthetic superiority. And why shouldn't he?
Friday, May 22, 2009
New Videocast: Is Adam Lambert's Androgyny a Text of Anxiety?

In this piece of Gendering the Media with Brikena Ribaj, I thought I would talk about the text of androgyny and the anxiety it may inspire.
The questions I raise are: Does the text of androgyny inform anxiety? Why?
I talk about American Idol, Pat Buchanan, make-up and eyeliner, and of course, literary theory. Because they all go so well together, I find.
Incidentally, I do not watch American Idol but I did notice the healthy amount of press that Adam Lambert generated. Naturally, I was curious and made it a point to see snippets of the finale.
The text of gender was indeed worthy an episode, I found.
You may view this new episode here.
Subscribe to Gendering the Media Podcast
graph per http://mybuddieslive.com/2009/03/27/adam-lambert%E2%80%99s-redemption/
Sunday, May 17, 2009
New Study on Gender and Academia
The abstract of the study says:
"Why aren’t there more women in science? Female college students are currently 37 percent less likely than males to obtain a bachelor’s degree in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), and comprise only 25 percent of the STEM workforce. This paper begins to shed light on this issue by exploiting a unique dataset of college students who have been randomly assigned to professors over a wide variety of mandatory standardized courses. We focus on the role of professor gender. Our results suggest that while professor gender has little impact on male students, it has a powerful effect on female students’ performance in math and science classes, their likelihood of taking future math and science courses, and their likelihood of graduating with a STEM degree. The estimates are largest for female students with very strong math skills, who are arguably the students who are most suited to careers in science. Indeed, the gender gap in course grades and STEM majors is eradicated when high performing female students’ introductory math and science classes are taught by female professors. In contrast, the gender of humanities professors has only minimal impact on student outcomes. We believe that these results are indicative of important environmental influences at work. "
The full study may be found here.
"Why aren’t there more women in science? Female college students are currently 37 percent less likely than males to obtain a bachelor’s degree in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), and comprise only 25 percent of the STEM workforce. This paper begins to shed light on this issue by exploiting a unique dataset of college students who have been randomly assigned to professors over a wide variety of mandatory standardized courses. We focus on the role of professor gender. Our results suggest that while professor gender has little impact on male students, it has a powerful effect on female students’ performance in math and science classes, their likelihood of taking future math and science courses, and their likelihood of graduating with a STEM degree. The estimates are largest for female students with very strong math skills, who are arguably the students who are most suited to careers in science. Indeed, the gender gap in course grades and STEM majors is eradicated when high performing female students’ introductory math and science classes are taught by female professors. In contrast, the gender of humanities professors has only minimal impact on student outcomes. We believe that these results are indicative of important environmental influences at work. "
The full study may be found here.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Androgyny: From Australia, With Love

This photo comes at a good time. As it is the case with many things in life, the theory behind a social text and/or behavior is not always congruent with its actual manifestation in life. I explain, a theoretical discussion of gender generally and androgyny specifically is one thing but how a gendered expression of identity presents itself might be another.
Theory aside, I quite liked this Australia-based photo that sartorialist just posted.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
My Radio Episode: What is Gender Theory? Who Was Havelock Ellis?

I created and recorded this piece for public radio. I was asked to contribute a piece that would tackle gender theory. So, this is a short piece on theorist Havelock Ellis who, before Sigmund Freud, contributed much to our understanding of gender and psychology. Freud, folks, didn't come up with all the things he is often associated with.
And this piece is my tip of the hat to Havelock Ellis.
You can listen to this piece here.
Feedback welcome.
Subscribe to Gendering the Media Podcast
graph per images.google
Friday, April 17, 2009
New Videocast: Tip of the Hat to Eve!
In this short videocast I give a 'tip of the hat' to the wonderfully influential gender theorist, Eve Sedgwick.
The question I pursue is: what is a gendered identity?
Thank you for the truly inspiring literary analyses, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.
You can watch the short videocast here.
You can also watch these episodes on iTunes as they get uploaded every Friday. The sound and video quality might also be better there.
The podcast series titles are:
Gendering the Media with Brikena Ribaj
and
On Love: De Amore with Brikena Ribaj
The question I pursue is: what is a gendered identity?
Thank you for the truly inspiring literary analyses, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.
You can watch the short videocast here.
You can also watch these episodes on iTunes as they get uploaded every Friday. The sound and video quality might also be better there.
The podcast series titles are:
Gendering the Media with Brikena Ribaj
and
On Love: De Amore with Brikena Ribaj
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
James A. Schultz' Book

Those of you interested in Literary and Gender Theory and the literature of the Middle Ages will enjoy James A. Schultz' excellent book Courtly Love, the Love of Courtliness, and the History of Sexuality.
I was asked by the journal German Quarterly to review Schultz' book and I happily reviewed it. Schultz' work is amazingly well contextualized, elegantly written, and smart.
A bit of my review says:
"Schultz's Courtly Love, the Love of Courtliness, and the History of Sexuality, provides an informed and contextualized investigation of courtly love and the courtliness aspect of this form of love in the German Middle Ages. This carefully historicized and gender-focused work will be a helpful tool not only for German and European medievalists but also gender theorists and scholars of any literary period."
You can read that review here.
RIP, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick

With sadness I express that today marks the death of one of the most influential gender theorists of our time, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.
Sedgwick's systematic and subtle work on the anxieties and relations between people who shared the same sex was instrumental in creating the field of Queer Theory.
Another very interesting thing about Sedgwick is that in real life she was a practicing heterosexual, married to a man. For some very bizarre reason, many found it odd that she should be one of the founders of Queer Theory, even though she is a straight woman. In her work and real life, Sedgwick stood for fluidity and I will be missing terribly her contributions to the field.
Rest in peace, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.
Note: I will go to the studio in the next hour and my next videocast will be related to Sedgwick's work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


